Net Neutrality – A Global Perspective on Internet Access

In January 2025, the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) latest attempt to enforce net neutrality. This ruling contrasts with India’s approach over the past decade. While the U.S. debates the issue, India has established a strong stance against discriminatory data pricing. The differing motivations behind these battles reflect the unique challenges faced by each country.

About Net Neutrality

Net neutrality is the principle that internet service providers (ISPs) must treat all data on the internet equally. It prevents ISPs from discriminating against specific websites or services. This concept is crucial for maintaining an open internet where all users have equal access to information and services.

The U.S. Context

In the United States, tech companies like Netflix opposed ISPs’ attempts to charge for faster access. Digital rights advocates joined this fight, fearing the creation of “fast lanes” and “slow lanes.” The Obama administration initially supported net neutrality, but the rules were later rolled back under President Trump. The Biden administration reinstated these rules, denoting the ongoing struggle over internet access.

India’s Journey

India’s battle for net neutrality began in 2014. Telecom giant Reliance Jio’s entry revolutionised mobile data pricing, making it more affordable. Prior to this, Bharti Airtel’s attempts to impose higher tariffs on internet calls sparked widespread protests. The debate evolved into a fight against zero rating, where certain services were exempt from data charges.

Regulatory Responses in India

The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) banned discriminatory pricing in 2016. In 2018, net neutrality became a requirement for all telecom operators. This ensured that ISPs could not prioritise certain services or charge differently based on the content. R.S. Sharma, former TRAI chairperson, emphasised that ISPs should not act as gatekeepers.

Recent Developments in India

In recent years, Indian telecom companies have sought to introduce a network usage fee, demanding payments from large internet companies for the data they consume. This demand has raised concerns among net neutrality advocates. Sharma dismissed this idea, stating that ISPs should not charge differently for bandwidth based on the company using it. The Government of India has yet to seriously consider this proposal.

Future of Net Neutrality

Despite the victories for net neutrality in India, challenges remain. TRAI recommended creating a multi-stakeholder body to oversee net neutrality issues in 2022, but the proposal was rejected due to budget constraints. The ongoing discourse indicates that the future of net neutrality will require continued vigilance from advocates and policymakers alike.

Questions for UPSC:

1. Examine the implications of net neutrality on digital innovation and consumer rights.
2. Critically discuss the role of regulatory bodies in maintaining net neutrality in India and the United States.
3. Point out the differences in public response to net neutrality debates in India and the United States.
4. Analyse the potential impact of network usage fees on the competitive landscape of the internet in India.

Answer Hints:

1. Examine the implications of net neutrality on digital innovation and consumer rights.

1. Net neutrality encourages innovation by ensuring equal access to all online services, allowing startups to compete with established companies.
2. Consumers benefit from a level playing field, where they can access any content without restrictions or additional fees.
3. Without net neutrality, ISPs could prioritize their services or partners, stifling competition and limiting consumer choices.
4. Innovation may suffer if companies must pay for “fast lanes,” diverting resources from development to regulatory compliance.
5. Consumer rights are upheld as net neutrality prevents ISPs from censoring or throttling access to specific content or services.

2. Critically discuss the role of regulatory bodies in maintaining net neutrality in India and the United States.

1. In the U.S., the FCC plays important role, implementing and enforcing net neutrality rules, though its authority has fluctuated with different administrations.
2. In India, the TRAI has been proactive, banning discriminatory pricing and solidifying net neutrality in telecom regulations.
3. Regulatory bodies must balance industry interests with consumer rights, ensuring fair competition and access to information.
4. In both countries, the effectiveness of regulatory bodies is challenged by lobbying from telecom companies seeking to alter net neutrality rules.
5. Public advocacy and legal challenges have influenced regulatory actions, denoting the importance of stakeholder engagement in the process.

3. Point out the differences in public response to net neutrality debates in India and the United States.

1. In the U.S., the debate has been heavily influenced by tech companies like Netflix, with public engagement driven by digital rights advocates.
2. India’s response was catalyzed by telecom pricing practices, leading to widespread grassroots movements against discriminatory data pricing.
3. Public sentiment in India is more focused on affordability and access, while in the U.S., it often centers around corporate interests and competition.
4. Social media played important role in mobilizing public opinion in both countries, but the nature of the campaigns differed based on local contexts.
5. In India, the entry of affordable mobile datly shaped public perception, making net neutrality a vital concern for everyday users.

4. Analyse the potential impact of network usage fees on the competitive landscape of the internet in India.

1. Network usage fees could create barriers for smaller companies, limiting their ability to compete with larger firms that can afford to pay.
2. Such fees may lead to a tiered internet experience, where only well-funded companies can ensure fast and reliable access to consumers.
3. The introduction of these fees could deter innovation, as startups may lack the resources to pay for prioritized access.
4. Consumer costs could rise if ISPs pass on the fees to users, undermining the affordability of internet services.
5. The competitive landscape may shift, favoring established players while stifling new entrants, ultimately harming consumer choice and quality.